Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was unaware the high % in Va's 3 biggest metros-that may make it more urban than NY. Unreal.
Pa presents a 2nd GOP problem: HC was far more popular in the less blue parts of Pa than Obama, and would likely severely cut GOP margins there, no matter who the opponent is.
PS, Dole-McCain Republican, The Dems have been doing better largely because of Pa urbanization; Philly isn't growing pop as much a neighboring burbs are, burbs that are largely blue, but not covered by the media IMO the way they should have been. As is the case in much of the USA, conservative parts of Pa are stagnant in population, most likely due to feeble economic conditions and being older populations overall.
NY is still far more urban than VA. NY is about 87.9% urban (12th nationally) while VA is about 75.5% (22nd nationally). This is per a search for urbanization rate by state per Wiki. It's not the same as density per acre. It means that the population of a state is concentrated into urban areas. Therefore, Nevada, Hawaii, Utah and Arizona are listed in the top 10. They don't fit the profile of what you normally think of urban states, but three of the four at least have vast wastelands with little or no populations while high percentages live in places like Salt Lake City, Las Vegas or Phoenix or Tucson.
I was unaware the high % in Va's 3 biggest metros-that may make it more urban than NY. Unreal.
Pa presents a 2nd GOP problem: HC was far more popular in the less blue parts of Pa than Obama, and would likely severely cut GOP margins there, no matter who the opponent is.
PS, Dole-McCain Republican, The Dems have been doing better largely because of Pa urbanization; Philly isn't growing pop as much as neighboring burbs are, burbs that are largely blue, but not covered by the media IMO the way they should have been. As is the case in much of the USA, conservative parts of Pa are stagnant in population, most likely due to feeble economic conditions and being older populations overall.
Bobtn, you make a very good point about the blue Philly suburbs conintually being ignored by the mainstream media.
I also agree with you that the Clintons are far more popular than Obama in the parts of PA outside the Philly area. I know that Obama did very poorly in western PA (and central PA as well, but all Democrats do poorly there), but he was able to overcome that as the result of a solid performance in the heavily populated eastern part of the state. (The result, of course, was that Obama won the state by a lesser than expected margin.) Hillary won't do nearly as poorly as Obama did in western PA, which is why I am very skeptical of a GOP victory in that state. If the election was between Jeb Bush and Barack Obama, I honestly think that the GOP would have a decent chance of victory in PA.
Truthfully, Obama underperformed any other Dem who could have been on the ticket in western Pa. It was offset by more urbanization, similar to NOVA's affect on Va. Fairly soon, we may see Blue Pa statewide margins far outside the state even being contested by the GOP. Simply put, combine urbanization with performing in western Pa at normal Dem standards, and the numbers for the GOP turn dire.
Since my source was Wiki, I just checked the data source using Michael Barone's 2014 edition of his Almanac of American Politics. NY is listed as 87.9% urban, 12.1% rural, using census data. Of course there's some wiggle room in what the Feds determine as urban or rural, but that's officially how it's listed.
Bobtn, you make a very good point about the blue Philly suburbs conintually being ignored by the mainstream media.
I also agree with you that the Clintons are far more popular than Obama in the parts of PA outside the Philly area. I know that Obama did very poorly in western PA (and central PA as well, but all Democrats do poorly there), but he was able to overcome that as the result of a solid performance in the heavily populated eastern part of the state. (The result, of course, was that Obama won the state by a lesser than expected margin.) Hillary won't do nearly as poorly as Obama did in western PA, which is why I am very skeptical of a GOP victory in that state. If the election was between Jeb Bush and Barack Obama, I honestly think that the GOP would have a decent chance of victory in PA.
I agree with you on Jeb. His numbers in polls aren't great, and his brother may have damaged the family brand, but still, Jeb looks to me to be about as credible a candidate as the GOP could have for states like Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania in particular, if he gets the nomination and can actually run as Jeb Bush.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,458,803 times
Reputation: 6670
^ Yeah, it'll be Jeb fer sure on the GOP side. And with his "Right to Rise" campaign, it looks like he might be coming up with a strategy that courts the 'mainstream' while still hanging onto the party's "base"… something Romney (or McCain) couldn't seem to manage. But whether the 'name' has become too toxic remains to be seen. Though unfortunately, a lot of voters have a pretty short memory!
Bureaucrat, thank you for your insightful post, but I too take those computer program results with a grain of salt. NC, FL, & OH--in that order--are obviously the easiest swing states for Republicans. But after that, I think that the next ripest target is IA, given its demographics and the fact that it seems less liberal than the remaining swing states. I am honestly not sure if WI or VA is the best bet after that: WI is the least secure state in the blue wall and has favorable demographics to the GOP (though it still has a very long tradition of liberalism), while the GOP still does better in presidential elections in VA than in WI (despite the fact that VA is trending Democratic, I believe that trend has slowed down since 2012).
The GOP should seriously consider PA, but I do feel discouraged about that state since Bush lost it twice despite spending massive resources there. The huge black population in Philadelphia makes it such a challenge for Republicans, and it is such an expensive state in which to compete. I honestly think that both WI and VA are easier than PA. Regarding CO, I couldn't disagree more: the GOP really should avoid that state at all costs. The only reason why they narrowly won a Senate seat was because Gardner ran a great campaign while Udall ran a terrible one. At the same time, an unpopular Democratic governor won re-election by a wider margin than by which Gardner won.
I was playing with the numbers on an electoral map on 270 to Win, and if the GOP were to take Iowa and Wisconsin, in addition to taking Florida and Ohio, and leave everything else like it was in 2012, the result would be a 269-269 tie, with the decision going to the House who would pick a Republican President. That would be a madhouse.
^ Yeah, it'll be Jeb fer sure on the GOP side. And with his "Right to Rise" campaign, it looks like he might be coming up with a strategy that courts the 'mainstream' while still hanging onto the party's "base"… something Romney (or McCain) couldn't seem to manage. But whether the 'name' has become too toxic remains to be seen. Though unfortunately, a lot of voters have a pretty short memory!
voters are not that stupid. The main reason Mccain and Romney lost was because Bush gave a bad name to the Republican name. It was so bad that W bush couldn't campaign for Mccain or Romney.
Meanwhile, Bill Clinton campaigned for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and in many ways was a big help to Obama.
Bush father was a failure that's why he lost in 1992.......W bush left the nation with a bad taste in their mouth, that's the only reason a Chicago community organizer with no executive experienced won.......and you think a 3rd Bush is going to change people's minds? lol
Last edited by Hellion1999; 01-12-2015 at 04:26 PM..
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,458,803 times
Reputation: 6670
^ Perhaps, though never underestimate the ability of Dems to shoot themselves in the foot!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
